Sorry that you got me wrong Sad
I was never mocking you. I appreciate your opinion and enjoy this conversation. You say some very clever things sometimes and mostly we even have the same opinion, only not here.
When you stated all the possible movements of the pecs, I felt a little mocked.
Sorry, I didn't mean to do so. I totally forgot that you were a doctor, and I didn't remember that. So sorry if I sounded as if I was trying to "school" you or act as if you were uneducated. Sorry for coming off that way.
I appreciate your inputs as well, I was just getting mixed signals and I wasn't sure so I thought I'd ask before saying that you did. Thanks for the clear up and sorry again
Yes, it is. But it is no stimulus. AND you get increased blood flow in every worked muscle, wether you feel the pump or not. And the blood flow is a reason for stretching after weights, which i always do and advise to do.
By the way, even when you're a pump junkie, you can get awesome pump with free weights Very Happy
I agree with that. I was just stating that the blood is a big facor in regards to growing muscles. Without stimulus, nothing would happen. But the same goes in regards to the blood.
Im not trying to say that the blood is more important than the stimulus, but that you need both to achieve great results. Like I also mentioned in regards to the nitric oxide, that's what it does and people have had great results with the supplement version. I have a friend that went on it and it worked great.
Do you really believe that the deltoids would be worked too much in this scenario by doing barbell curls? That you wouldn't be able to make your biceps catch up because the deltoids benefit as much from curls?
Not only the deltoids, but also the traps. A lot of muscles contract to add to the stabilization, and that alone would waste energy. Contraction of any particular muscle already starts to take out of the ATP stores.
I don't personally think that in general it would make a lot of difference in growing the deltoids alone, but my idea is that if you are focusing on the biceps alone, wouldn't you want to cancel out any other muscles that you are not focusing on to improve? This would leave you more energy to workout the biceps since you will not be contracting other muscles to stabilize the body, as well as avoid injury if you plan on going heavy. I'll address the rest in regards to what you said about Topher
I meant BIG muscles. You can get muscles to grow with cables, to a certain extend, as a beginner.
Sorry about that. I hadthe impression that you were saying you would make no gains. But how could you not grow bigger muscles if you keep on meeting the demands of more and more weight? The principle that you need to increase weight in order to build stronger and bigger muscles alone should be enough to accept that cables could big bigger muscles, even for non beginners. Shouldn't it? If not, why is your opinion as to why it wouldn't?
You don't need to cycle away from free weights. Cycle the volume, the frequency, the rep range, the intensity, the exercises, everything - no need and no reason for doing machines.
I shouldve been more clear on that, I think I mixed things up there. Yes you can stay on free weights and still gain. What I meant was that for whatever you are planning, there are different avenues to take, therefore there are cycles. If you are trying to isolate a muscle the best you can, then you would go to machines so that you focus only on that muscle alone.
I think you can focus on biceps very well with dumbells or barbells. A machine can't replace your focus and concentration. In fact, i feel that with a dumbell the concentration is better than with a machine.
What you say about machines is very theoretic. I haven't found a machine that lets me isolate my biceps as well as dumbell do. The prescribed movement prevents it, instead of focusing on your biceps you have to follow a probably suboptimal way of movement. Machines are not perfectly copying the natural movement while taking away the need to stabilize (that sounds like from an advertising for gym machines Razz ).
I think your point made here is really good in terms of proving your idea. However I still disagree. The reason is that while it prevents other movement, if you were to do say a preacher curls, you are could fidget any which way because you have to stabilize your arm. If you do this on a machine, it is already controlled for you and therefore you wont need to involve other muscles in order to keep it in order.
Like you also said, that is why you can do free weight exercises with proper and strict form. My defense against that would be if you are doing it with proper and strict form, then you would be doing less weight in order to appease the stregnth of your stabilizer muscles.
Okay, sorry, i did get that wrong. I'd still prefer free weights as isolation exercises, though Wink
As i said above: i don't think the back, or delts, or legs would get more workout than the biceps by any biceps isolation exercise with free weights. Say standing barbell curls - you need to stand up straight and fix the upper arms while curling, so you need stabilizers. But the main focus is still on biceps. You won't give up on your last rep because the delts are grilled - the biceps are.
I mentioned the reasons I believe above
That is a common misconception.
I was talking about natural bodybuilding. For roid users apply different rules. They can grow with cable isolation work. Actually, i guess the reason why many hormone freaks do a lot of isolation exercises is not that they want to improve their symmetry, but that these exercises are done with lower weights and put them at a lower risk of tearing a muscle or tendon. Successful bodybuilders always rely on free weights.
This statement you quoted implies that bodybuilders are not as strong as they look and that machines/isolation is better for shaping your physique, i disagree with both (in natural BB).
Another point comes to me.
I take it that the reason why you say that it works for roid users is because the roids already build the muscles, even with little working out? I have noticed that a lot of BBers do use light weight, and that is mainly when they just do them really fast and even without proper technique.
Also they are pros. Why would their risk of getting a sprain or strain be any more important than natural BBers? If anything, Naturals should be more affraid since there lifts are probably not even close to the roids users. Also, they have the roids working for them at an anabolic level, so why would they be more concerned with tear than say a natural who doesn't use it. Also if they are on roids, we know that they use other supplements besides that.
The weights you use on a machine are higher than with free weights, right? For example, incline bench, machine vs. free barbell. Topher just wrote that he did 350lbs on that machine. Now Topher sure is a muscular guy, but i guess he can't do the same weight on the barbell. This would be a LOT for free weights! Now if the machines put the focus on the worked muscle, and you use more weight, why don't you get much bigger from them? You should be bigger doing 350lbs in the machine than doing them free weight - you're focusing on pecs etc.!
And doing 350 free you'd already be a HUGE guy!
Good point, I think thats your best statement since this entire debate!
Veganessentials and I already discussed the limiting factors in regards to machine. The cables, the angle, etc. that affects the actual resistance that is being applied.
I also had a friend that could do the 300s on the chest press, but for bench he was stuck at around 250. My idea for this would be, as stated the limiting factors, as well as the stabilization muscles and gravity together. When you are doing machines, the gravity isn't as strong as with free weights. Also when you do inclines, the handles are already there for you to grab, you don't have to pick it up first, and then go down.
We discussed that the weight issue with machines is a bit of a discrepency, I don't disagree with that.
Take care and sorry again for the confusion